Video není dostupné.
Omlouváme se.
The Four "ALLs": Summarizing Wesleyan Theology
Vložit
- čas přidán 26. 05. 2021
- Classically, Wesleyan Christians summarized their message with four statements, each beginning with the word "All".
All need to be Saved. (Romans 3:23)
All can be Saved. (1 John 2:2)
All can know they are Saved. (Romans 8:14-16; 1 John 5:13)
All can be Saved completely, to the uttermost. (1 Thess. 5:23; Eph. 4:13)
Four alls:
1. All need to be saved
2. All can be saved
3. All can know they are saved
4. All can be saved to the uttermost
Thank you so much for this clear summation of Methodist beliefs. I was raised Methodist (Cornish Methodist miner family) but for some unknown reason my family stopped attending church when I was a youth, and my teenage years were spent churchless. (Happily the Holy Spirit continually worked in my life until I accepted Jesus as my Saviour.)
I'm an Eastern Orthodox, and I had heard from a number of individuals that Wesleyan Theology is the most similar Protestant Theology to Orthodox Theology. I'm out learning a bit about Wesleyan Theology to see if that's indeed true, and about all you said in this video could, in my perspective, be confused for Orthodoxy! It's really cool to see that!
Yes! Wesleyanism and Anglo Catholicism are closest to the Orthodox are the most similar to one another (Inwardly)
Love the balance they all hold and maintain!
What about 5 solas and original sin? That makes the gap pretty big?
@@mikezeke7041 he didn't say the gap wasn't still substantial. He said that compared to most other protestant denominations the Wesley brothers still emphasised certain things that are strikingly similar to orthodox theology and which were in contrast to the dominant western views of the day
@@Bellg John Wesley was very big into reading the eastern fathers of the church, so it makes sense
Fun fact there is a story that Wesley was secretly ordained by an Orthodox Bishop to the episcopacy. Supposedly he did this so give Methodism apostolic succession.
But overall there is no protestant tradition like E Orthodoxy. Some overlap with the mystical theology in the medieval period...maybe some with with holiness tradition re theosis, but minor
This is the true Gospel. Thank you.
Daniel, thank you for taking the time to share this. God has saved me and as Wesley believed, we can live a life free from sin. Few churches preach this. Few preachers have experienced freedom from sin. Thank God for the cleansing blood of Jesus that allows this freedomin Him.
Thank you for this video. I've always had a difficult time accepting the limited atonement and unconditional election beliefs of Reformed Theology. This is the first I've heard of the four All's. Really makes sense.
Wesley's sermon, "Free Grace" is still one of the best sermons I've ever read on the subject of God's free grace versus Calvinism' eternal exhaustive decree... It obliterates Calvinism's understanding of these things.
Reverend that was a very helpful short lesson. I’m currently reading the First Global Methodist transitional Book of Discipline and your commentary makes a light easy subject. God bless you, sir.
Hello, where/how did you get a copy of The new GMC Discipline? Thank you.
Came to Christ via a Wesleyan pastor in 8/19 (RIGHT before the pandemic) and thankful to have others help clarify the nuances between denominations.
Also love that you're not afraid to have your HP books on display in the background!
I go to a Wesleyan church you are so spot on the theology! God bless thank you for enlightening me!
I loved the presentation but I just wanted to tell you I have the same record player that's behind you 🤣 But yes, the 4 All's truly show the love and grace of God.
Lutherans and Methodists should be in complete fellowship. I feel the difference in complete sanctification are really minimal, because as the pastor explains, Methodists don't affirm a sort of cultish sanctification, but of a striving towards sanctification.
As someone who was raised in a soteriologically Reformed-leaning Lutheran denomination, it took me a lot of years to understand how correct you are. Though I’m Anglican now, my theological leanings are still pretty Lutheran, and I’d say I primarily disagree with Wesleyans about when the human will is enabled to cooperate with grace and what precisely the New Testament means by regeneration, but otherwise find myself quite close to their views on matters like election and sanctification.
I was raised in the Wesleyan tradition, I very often find myself confusing my desire to live a life of service with the need to be perfect. I sometimes place blame upon Wesleyan theology for the intense self-scrutiny I have. I can currently clearly see that making mistakes is okay, and that it's my friendship with Christ that holds the water. When I forget this I miss an opportunity to be an even better friend to Jesus.
I think we live in this constant tension, or dynamic, or tug of war between "be perfect as your Heavenly Father is perfect" and "My grace is sufficient for you".
Very useful to me. Thanks
Hey Dan enjoying the videos, wondered if you could do a session on the books on your bookshelves behind you? I have some the same as well I can see. Bless you brother. From here in the Uk
Very well said
Thanks for this video, I am a Reformed Baptist and I am researching Wesleyan Theology.
I wouldn’t label myself a Calvinist but I do hold by the doctrine of election.......
Thanks again!
Enlightening
Yes! Whenever I read the Torah, I’ve always felt like it was a promise god was making to us. I feel like people think that just because WE can’t do it that it can’t be done. But Jesus said that with God all things are possible! God did not say “you must be blameless before the Lord, your God” he says “You shall be blameless” meaning that if you believe what he’s said, you will be blameless. But like you said, it’s not because of our power or strength that we fulfill the promises that God made us, but by his grace, through Jesus Christ, our savior!
My biggest concern with Calvinism is that what I’ve read about it takes away all hope I have to evangelize and spread the Gospel to as many people as I possibly can. Knowing that anyone who believes can be saved gives me the hope that God can save my family and friends and coworkers, and neighbors and countrymen.
I am curious how Wesleyan theology resolves Romans 9, because personally, I think that is the only leg Calvinism has to stand on, and I personally don’t understand why the Bible would say “God so loved the WORLD”, if salvation was only for a chosen few?
Great video! Even growing up in a Wesleyan church I learned a lot from you. Thank you!
The way you talk reminds me of Ted Cruz. Very engaging and compelling, thanks again.
Hello. Thank you for the video. Is there a book recommendation that would address the For Alls?
I don't know of a book that is focused specifically upon "The 4 Alls" (though there probably is one), but a couple of basic introductions to Wesleyan theology that I think are good are:
Theology in the Wesleyan Spirit by Outler
www.amazon.com/Theology-Wesleyan-spirit-Albert-Outler/dp/B0006CEGI4
The Way to Heaven: The Gospel According to John Wesley by Harper
www.christianbook.com/way-heaven-gospel-according-john-wesley/steve-harper/9780310252603/pd/52603?product_redirect=1&search_term=the%20way%20to%20heaven&Ntt=52603&item_code=&ps_exit=PRODUCT|legacy&Ntk=keywords&event=ESRCP
Hello. I am a Calvinist.
Wesleyan theology is really interesting, however, the Methodist denomination has started to fall away from Wesley's teachings, and even some of the biblical standards we must hold to. Therefore, I've found the Wesleyan denomination to be much more stable and biblical than the Methodists at this point. If anyone is looking to join any Methodist churches, I recommend trying to find a Wesleyan, or at least a traditional Methodist church instead.
I actually Just did a video on this same subject matter
So if a person who believes they are entirely sanctified falls in sin. Does that mean they are no longer entirely sanctified?
I have a problem with Wesley because he was really into mysticism. That's a red flag to me.
Hmmm. How so?
If you think Wesley was into mysticism, you don’t understand him.
Grace must reign in you and Grace teaches you to live holy, godly lives (Titus 2:11-12). Absolute surrender, or making Jesus Christ Lord is a prerequisite of John 14:23 and Acts 5:32b. John 8:51. Luke 6:46-49. John 8:36-39. Rom 5:21; Rom 6. Rom 6:19,22. Heb 12:4,14. John 15:1-14. The “salvation” is in three tenses and most people stop at the first tense thinking it’s a done deal because they are justified by faith, but ignore sanctification and forget they have not been glorified yet to receive their immortal body after the judgment of the just and unjust. The assurance or witness Wesley teaches is the start of a lifelong walk of obedience, of abiding in the Words of Christ and His Spirit, enduring to the end. 1 Cor 16:22. We must love Christ or be accursed. To love Christ is to obey Him (John 14:15,21,23-24) and to abide (remain, continue) in Him. Rom 8:1-2,4,13.
Q: If John Piper and MacArthur believe Wesleyans are quasi-heretical, yet Wesleyanism/Arminianism are not quasi-heretical but ardent evangelical or Bible-based, then what do we say of John Piper and MacArthur? False prophets, maybe?
I would say that "false prophet" is a pretty serious charge for me to throw out about any teacher. No doubt we all get some things wrong; and of course there are historic debates between theological traditions (Calvinist vs Wesleyan; Lutheran vs Zwinglian; Protestant vs Roman, etc.) that are still unresolved and in all of these debates someone (and maybe everyone) is wrong on some of the big points. But I think there is a difference between honestly seeking to be Biblically orthodox, teaching in harmony (as best we may) with the ancient church, and getting some stuff wrong on the one hand, and being a false prophet or false teacher on the other hand. Now, if we are talking about a flat out rejection of Biblical authority, or major Creedal teachings, that is where the language of heresy really does get more descriptive.
@@danielhixon8209 OK, then. I'm good with "Quasi-False Prophet", too. BTW, huge appreciation and respect for you responding! I actually typed this for the thread followers as most CZcamsrs don't read or respond. You're doing a great job, and I hope you continue!
I've taken on a new approach to the Calvinist debate after seeing John Piper say he didn't think his Arminian friends were heretics, but they certainly aren't right. Then he referred to Arminians as Pelagian, and labeled Pelagius a heretic. So, I began to think...
If Arminians are flat-out, straight-up Bible-based evangelicals, and Piper doesn't recognize them as such, then what label do we use for Piper (and Calvinists)? Well, I'm not willing to label them, "heretics", either, but I sure can identify them as an evangelical cult. Not a Christian cult, but an evangelical cult.
@@JAFAtuber How can Arminians be straight up Bible based evangelicals when
Arminianism isn't sound doctrine
@@miguelz8721 I'm quite confident you're not well-versed in either Scripture or Arminianism so I do not know how to answer that generalized question.
@@JAFAtuber very poor discernment ,
Anyways here's a simple question how does the human will fit in with John 1:13 KJV ?
People fall for this because they don’t read their Bible.
So, what you're basically saying is that John Wesley taught that we should be Christians.
It is easy to see a nail sticking out of the wood - and not only do you see it - you trip over it - Wesley begs the question - CAN....all these things be true? Of course they CAN. If the earth crashes into the sun - it CAN be destroyed. Couching every statement by beginning with the word "CAN" ultimately leads one to believe that anything CAN be possible. The reality is in the end God's Will trumps man's can. God's truth trumps Wesley and his follower's logical fallacy.
You are quite right to note that what can be is not necessarily a guarantee of what will be. I do wonder, though if there is a fundamental category mistake in assuming that God's will and man's will are always in competition with one another, the way one man's will and another man's will often are. God is the one who created me with a will and sustains and enables every decision I make; how then could I really be "competing" with him in such a way that a decision I make somehow detracts from his glory and grace? His glory and grace are precisely what enable me to make decisions at all. Scripture affirms what philosophers call "double agency" in places like Isaiah 26:12 and Philippians 2:12-13. There is a mystery and paradox here that does not fit neatly into categories we can fully grasp (it was not intended to); but I see no contradiction between this and what Wesleyans affirm in the "4 Alls."
@@danielhixon8209 You might want to study the doctrines of Providence and Predestination and then get back with me sometime next year.
Wesley argued again Calvinism, so why even bring it up?
You mean, "and others to be passed over".
Calvinists are Theologically INSANE.
No one knows the Father except the Son, and those to whom He chooses to reveal Him.
He has lost none of the ones the Father gave Him. All that were given to Him before the world was even created will be saved. ALL that were chosen…Stop with the “Calvinism” trigger. Just read the scriptures for yourselves. The doctrines of grace are so clearly stated.
"Anyone and everyone who believes in Him" which are those, by the power of the spirits work, believe. One cannot say (believe) that Christ is Lord without the Holy Spirit.
You're saying the same thing that calvanists believe in Limited Atonement, just putting more emphasis on the fact that we do not, and will not know *who* those are who truly are saved or not. I guess you can call it a safety net in how you share the Gospel, but it's boils down to those who God chose before the foundations of the world, are indeed the only ones who will and *can* believe.
"ALL CAN BE SAVED!" - - - (???)
___BUT___
THE LORD JESUS SAID; "Matt. 26.28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for *"""many"""* for the remission of sins. [KJV] emphasis mine
THERE IS A GRAVE DIFERENCE, EH WHAT???!!!!
Well, if Christ gave his life for "all" people - that would indeed be a great "many" people, wouldn't it? The Greek in Matt. 26:28 is "pollon", which means "many." 1 Timothy 2:6 on the other hand says Christ "gave himself a ransom for all (Greek "panton")." By the Wesleyan read both of these statements are true, since "all" is in fact very "many." However the folks who say that Christ only died for some, have to then hold that 1 Timothy 2:6 is a lie or falsehood. So the Wesleyan approach is what it is because we are trying to hold a consistently high view of "all Scripture" which is "inspired by God." Hope that helps explain why we are coming at this in this way.